Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 528 posts

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#51

Post by munk-a »

xethos wrote: post #40
866-RON-0-FEZ wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, consider that the smaller Saab better fits the mission profile for Canada, and may be cheaper to operate, all the while The Guardian is furiously beating off trying to turn this into a bigger story than it really is.

Cheaper to operate and mission-fit (debatable) is one thing, but the real question is: "Would this have happened without the US president's antics?"

Without the second election of Trump? It's likely. Canada's aircraft industry got majorly burned by the US in 2017 during his first administration and Biden didn't significantly reverse the impact in any way.

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#52

Post by daneel_w »

khriss wrote: post #30

I can understand why this change happened. Even if American equipment is superior, there is a lot of value to not depending on a supposed 'ally' which * Arbitrarily slapped high tariffs on all goods from Canada while exempting Russia and Belarus. * Threatened to take over the country by force. * Officially suspended the Permanent Joint Board on Defense between US and Canada because of criticism of US foreign policy b…

> "Even if American equipment is superior ..."

To address the article's context, is the E-3 Sentry superior to the Erieye/GlobalEye?

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#53

Post by jwandborg »

sedatk wrote: post #16
michaelscott wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does with Volvo, although I couldn't say how big it is relative to global industry. Within Europe it's a large player

A Chinese company owns Volvo since 2010 or so.

Volvo Cars is still headquartered in Sweden, and employ 22.4k people in Sweden out of 40k globally[1].

Given that the market for Volvo is global, it seems to me that Volvo Cars is still overwhelmingly Swedish, while at the same time being overwhelmingly controlled by Geely.

[1]; https://www.svt.se/nyheter/lokalt/vast/1000-personer-far-lam...

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#54

Post by mikeyouse »

866-RON-0-FEZ wrote: post #33
khriss wrote: post #30

I can understand why this change happened. Even if American equipment is superior, there is a lot of value to not depending on a supposed 'ally' which * Arbitrarily slapped high tariffs on all goods from Canada while exempting Russia and Belarus. * Threatened to take over the country by force. * Officially suspended the Permanent Joint Board on Defense between US and Canada because of criticism of US foreign policy b…

We call this confirmation bias. The Saab is likely cheaper to operate as it's a smaller plane and Canada only has to patrol its northern border.

> Canada only has to patrol its northern border.

At what point on this current trajectory in the US would that change... mostly facetiously, but not entirely..

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#55

Post by danesparza »

866-RON-0-FEZ wrote: post #33
khriss wrote: post #30

I can understand why this change happened. Even if American equipment is superior, there is a lot of value to not depending on a supposed 'ally' which * Arbitrarily slapped high tariffs on all goods from Canada while exempting Russia and Belarus. * Threatened to take over the country by force. * Officially suspended the Permanent Joint Board on Defense between US and Canada because of criticism of US foreign policy b…

We call this confirmation bias. The Saab is likely cheaper to operate as it's a smaller plane and Canada only has to patrol its northern border.

"We call this confirmation bias".

I'm genuinely curious to know what you think the author's pre-existing beliefs are.

You seem to have a few of your own: "Canada only has to patrol its northern border"

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#56

Post by 866-RON-0-FEZ »

munk-a wrote: post #51
xethos wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cheaper to operate and mission-fit (debatable) is one thing, but the real question is: "Would this have happened without the US president's antics?"

Without the second election of Trump? It's likely. Canada's aircraft industry got majorly burned by the US in 2017 during his first administration and Biden didn't significantly reverse the impact in any way.

> Canada's aircraft industry got majorly burned by the US in 2017

Canada's aircraft industry has been on life support since long before Trump took office, having been forced to partner up with China.

The C-Series was divested to Airbus, the Dash 8 isn't produced anymore, and all Bombardier proper produces are biz-jets.

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#57

Post by danesparza »

OakNinja wrote: post #10
toxik wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sweden does not have a car industry. The fighter jets are a different matter, very strong technical moat and need to prove the system in combat. You can't just start a fighter jet business.

Volvo still produces cars in Sweden. Koenigsegg still build their cars in Ängelholm.

The Top Gear enthusiast in me loves that you included Koenigsegg in this conversation.

But including a company that hand-builds a handful of hypercars annually in a conversation about the auto industry in Sweden is not the flex you think it is.

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#58

Post by jsLavaGoat »

danesparza wrote: post #55
866-RON-0-FEZ wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We call this confirmation bias. The Saab is likely cheaper to operate as it's a smaller plane and Canada only has to patrol its northern border.

"We call this confirmation bias". I'm genuinely curious to know what you think the author's pre-existing beliefs are. You seem to have a few of your own: "Canada only has to patrol its northern border"

[flagged]

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#59

Post by petcat »

mikeyouse wrote: post #54
866-RON-0-FEZ wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We call this confirmation bias. The Saab is likely cheaper to operate as it's a smaller plane and Canada only has to patrol its northern border.

> Canada only has to patrol its northern border. At what point on this current trajectory in the US would that change... mostly facetiously, but not entirely..

Canada would only have to patrol its southern Alberta border /s

No coincidence that Albertans are sparking up the seceding issue again. When 10% of the population produces nearly 20% of the country's GDP it's a breeding ground for contempt. And it also seems like Albertans are the butt of a lot of jokes from the other Canadians anyway.

I'm sure this US government would love to see an "independent" Alberta.

Re: Canada to order military plane fleet from Sweden in shift from US suppliers

#60

Post by celsoazevedo »

joering2 wrote: post #50
kashunstva wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Canada has historically relied on a relatively stable trading relationship with the U.S. That relationship is a shambles. It remains to be seen how Canada retools itself; I imagine that we will see a blend of on-shoring and new trading sources. So it’s less of an issue of “can’t” and more “hasn’t (yet)”.

Frankly to me the fact Canada is "retooling itself" knowing well that this nightmare should be over in less than 3 years, and most likely next President will be a Democrat, but yet they keep retooling, means their strong (reliable?) assumption is that Trump Administration won't leave the office at all, similar to how Putin stayed in power in what arguingly is a Democratic Country.

This is Trump's second term and MAGA views won't disappear 3 years from now. Even if they assume that there will be a peaceful and lawful transition of power, I can see why they may be planning on the assumption that the "instability" (from their point of view) will continue into the future.
Post reply on HN